Is it safe for India to depend more on Nuclear power energy in the future?- Active GD

Members,

The world, especially Japan is on a brink of an atomic disaster. In India we have six nuclear power plants and 20 reactors. India is one of the top counties having more nuclear power plants. To develop industrially we need more energy no doubt. In Japan there are 55 reactors and eight of them are already closed due to disaster. Thousands of people are suffering due to the recent disaster. Do you think that all our reactors are safe?

On this situation, we are starting a group discussion regarding Is it safe for India to depend more on Nuclear power energy in the future?

Members can participate in this GD by making responses below. Do not exceed your response in 4 times. GD will be locked on 5th April.

The question of safety of the Indian nuclear power plants has become the concern of the hour. Especially in the backdrop of the Fukushima nuclear powerplant hazard, the Indian government need to think about closing down the Indian nuclear power plants.

At present, India has 6 nuclear power plants and many more are under construction. These plants have been playing a major role in India's nuclear power generation. But then, we have very recently witnessed how a human-made resource dangerously put the whole nation of Japan at risk. The aftereffects of the tsunami and the earthquake would not have been of this dangerous magnitude if it had not been for the break-down of the power plants.

It has been discovered that the Fukushima power plants were improperly protected and located at a region that was very vulnerable to quake and tsunami. The Japanese, famous for their technological know-how couldnot even identify these basic risks and it is when the disaster struck that they identified those risks. India being a developing country, it is impossible to think of what the Indian government can do in case such a disaster strikes us. Taking into account the population density of the Indian states, the impact can be many times greater.

I would definitely go with the suggestion that the Indian government should pay urgent attention to this matter. Either they should consent to shut down atleast those plants which are prone to any hazard. Or else they should rebuild the plants to safe areas. The plants should be properly protected and it should be made sure that the plants pose no threat to people, at any situation.

However important nuclear energy is to our development, the government should realize the need for safety. We donot want another nuclear disaster happening in our country.

Basically the question I am putting forward at this point of time is, why we are developing the technology? Is it to serve our future generation OR to show the world that India is wealthier than other countries in all aspects?

If we are developing the technology to serve our future generation, why should we make them to depend on the power which will sure make the disaster one day or the other?

If we are developing to show the world countries that India is wealthier in all aspects, then why should we show them by developing the destroying power like nuclear power reactors? Is it essential for us to depend on the nuclear power energy, while we are consuming only 2.2 percent of electricity generated by the nuclear power plants?

Why the scientists should not do some research to find out some other source for electricity to replace the Nuclear power plant?

Anyway India does not have the threat of earthquakes like in Japan often. But we also faced some problems once in a while in places like Gujarat, and Tsunami on 24th December 2004. So we should also cautious in this aspect. Incident in Japan is a caution alert to other countries having nuclear power plants, mainly to France, which is depend 75% on the nuclear power energy for electricity.Regards,

The recent earthquake and subsequent tsunami that effected Japan and its nuclear facilities has thrown some harsh realities in maintaining or creating nuclear facilities in India. Japan being a super power itself failed to contain the radio active element emerging from disasters has proved that India cannot cope up with such a arrangement. Prime Minister concerned over this has called for a detailed report on nuclear reactors and their actual safety in future.K Mohan'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "Even this challenging situation would ease

It is very unsafe for India if we depend largely on nuclear power energy for our future needs.Our nation needs to probe the positives and negatives before creating such nuclear power generating stations,since by doing this we can inculcate stronger policies or restrictions on these and continue to do research and develop newer ways of generating energy which is safer for all and the future generations as well.

Our country needs to study the after effects of such catastrophic disasters which may or can occur if nature has it's own fancies,with the live example of Japan eing one of them.We can never predict precisely what may occur as some areas may be falling under seismic zones or places of caution.

Our Prime Minister with all the related delegates including our brilliant sciencetists need to delve deeper to understand the pros and cons of implementing such present and future reactors.Regards,Arvind

No, it is definitely not safe for India to depend on nuclear power energy in the future. This has been proved without doubt by the recent natural calamities in Japan. Man-made creations simply cannot stand up to nature's fury and nature's fury is as unpredictable as death itself.

There have been talks about the safety of nuclear plants in India, about how they are self-cooling in the case of a disaster, etc. Are they really safe? I think we are totally ill-equipped to meet a disaster like the one in Japan and prevent the spread of radiation. What's more, I feel that harnessing of nuclear power energy is a very expensive initiative and is not really economically viable.

We don't need to depend on nuclear power energy at all. Why not make better & safer use of other sources of energy? We all know about how wind, water and the Sun can be used effectively to get energy. So why not spend the time & effort to check out these sources? In fact, if I am not mistaken, there have been reports of the successful harnessing of solar energy to power homes in rural India, of wind mills being successfully being set up to harness energy, and so on.When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

We should need to use other methods for generation of electricity. Nuclear energy generation is not safe at all. In India some of the area has been under very risk of earthquake. We should need to adopt other methods like wind energy, water energy, heat energy etc. Although using nuclear energy plant we can generate electricity easily and this can fulfills our requirements of energy. But we should need to think about the harms as we can give example of Japan disaster.

Nuclear energy is the most powerful energy which is the most suitable for countries like India. The energy cannot be destroyed, but changed from one form to another. This is the principle we are using in power generation through hydroelectric dams, thermal power stations and nuclear plants.

Let us learn from mistakes

Why is Fukushima reactor accident occurred?

Fukushima reactor is in the area of ring of fire. It is not only the case, but it is situated at the seismic seduction zone where two plates namely Japan plate and American plate always find place for intrusion. Japanese scientists prepared the reactor in such a way that it can withstand earthquakes. It had withstood the earthquake. But, the tsunami water disabled the generator system which gives the power to nuclear reactors. The fault here is that it is very near to ocean.

Are our reactors safe?

On my part, the answer is yes. Our country is not like Japan to face every day an earthquake. We have not constructed any reactor in the place of high seismic zone. We have Himalayan region where high seismic activity due to collision of two plates. But, we have not constructed any reactor in that area. In 2004, tsunami touched Indian coasts. Our nuclear plant Kalpakkam withstood the disaster.

Is nuclear power really necessary?

Yes, the nuclear power is really necessary. In 60 years, we are going to the brink of oil resources. In 100 years we use up our total coal reserves. It may be faster as our population is growing. Solar energy is not at all viable in India like country as it needs lot of space. Even our house is totally covered with solar plates it cannot provide enough electricity as we are gaining through conventional sources. It is costlier. Only a light based on solar to be charged in sunlight more than 6 hours for 2 hours light emission. At the most, we are living in crooked city life. Some houses are totally lit by bulbs instead of sunlight. At this instance, it is not viable to have solar energy. The role of hydroelectric dams is also lesser.

Is nuclear energy really dangerous than other ways?

The most disastrous way of producing energy is hydroelectric energy. If the earthquake occurs and breaks the barriers, it devours villages. The most dangerous way of producing energy is thermal energy which sends pollutants in air and kills person through asthma, bronchitis and so many in the list. We see so many affected people and we have never made it as dangerous. But, if we consider, the pollutants which are created by thermal energy plants killed more people than any other.

Is it safe for India to depend on nuclear energy in future?

- For 100 years, it is going to be the main source for energy as exhaustion of oil and coal resources started. This is truce time with nuclear energy. This is an energy genie which is to be tackled with utmost care. The priorities are already listed by India. We are destined to carry it further. Solar energy mission is started. Till solar energy technology is improved, we have no option, but to carry it further. Later, we can dig and cover up this genie in the earth."Look at ants and learn"

We can't disagree about the appropriate nuclear energy source to replace traditional resources like coal and natural gas to meet industrial and domestic demands of electricity in economically advancing India.

Japan has become economically the third largest nation in the world due to high growth of industries and agricultural products. In addition to other infrastructures Japan initiated to meet industrial electricity demands by installing many nuclear power plants around the country.

Unfortunately, Japan has faced a recent natural calamity which causes damage to their nuclear power plants in the worst affected area.

The disaster in Japan's nuclear plant due to unprecedented natural calamity has become a concern to all researchers ans scientists in the world for more tightening of protection and safety in nuclear power plant operation throughout the developed and developing countries.

I strongly believe that Japan will overcome the crisis on this devastation of their nuclear power plants formulating more advanced protection and safety system of nuclear power plants to stop recurrence of such disasters in future.

Government of India has taken many possible protective measures to guard our nuclear plants against any natural calamities in future.

However, in my view India is safe to depend on more nuclear power generating station by taking all types of protection and safety measures.

Hi Webmaster Sir,At the outset, kindly accept my gratitude for raising this issue.Before going in depth with the discussion thread, we must be aware of the the answer to this question:"how safe do people feel safe in India?".A vast majority won't raise their hands. In the sameway, India sure didn't make us feel safe and thermal power plant aren't the solutions."Give the world the best you have, and the best will come back to you"

Nuclear energy is one of the most efficient types of energy. It is not only efficient but causes very less ecological problems as well.

There is danger involved in all forms of technology. There is as much or perhaps even greater danger in hydroelectric generation if something dangerous occurs. What is a dam collapses all of a sudden? Millions will lose their lives, perhaps even a whole state can be washed out to sea. There is such a situation in Kerala where the Mullaperiyar dam which is over a hundred years old is feared to be very weak and even a small earthquake in that area may lead to its destruction. If such a thing happens then almost half of the Kerala state along with a population of over 1.5 crores will be washed out to sea and this includes the world famous city of Kochi as well.

So, there is danger in each and every aspect of human technology. Some people may say that nuclear energy must be avoided because it is dangerous. I feel it is the same as saying "You should not fly by aeroplanes because it is dangerous". Nuclear energy is needed and very much necessary.

Don't we stay in the Mumbai Taj, even after the 26/11 attacks? Don't we fly even after the Mangalore tragedy? Don't we love the Indian cricket team even after they have lost many matches? Don't we watch Bollywood movies even after so many have flopped? Didn't we sail after the Titanic sank? So, why ban nuclear power plants just because of a Fukushima?Chandu

On India's nuclear programme, I agree with Mr. Adwaith and Ms Vandana that India is a danger prone country if a Japan like nuclear disaster occurs. But keeping in view of our gigantic requirement s of the nuclear power, it is not advisable to shun away from the nuclear generation programme just because one country has undergone a tragedy. There are a lot of programmes and services all over the world which are danger prone and cause a loss of life and property in case of mishaps while running their day to day operations. Are we not running one of the largest networks of railways and airways serving to fulfil the daily needs of our travel and carrying our cargo from one place to another? Don't the accidents occur in providing these services? Have these accidents not caused a heavy loss of life and property over the years? Should we close down these services just because they are liable to cause accidents resulting in loss of life and property? This is only one example. We run quite a number of projects especially in defence research requiring the use of explosive materials. Should be close these research establishments because an explosion has occurred in some of these projects. My answer is an emphatic 'no' to all such questions.

Moreover, Japan is one of the most earthquake prone countries of the world. Of course, the earthquakes can occur in any part of the world but not to such an extent as they occur in Japan. So a happening in Japan should only make us cautious to make our nuclear plants and reactors safer by initiating the necessary measures. We cannot just close down the country’s nuclear plants and reactors after investing crores of rupees on them. India is a developing country. Its requirement of energy is on the increase. Taking into consideration the requirements of our power needs for industry, agriculture, transport and other sectors and the deficiency in power production we are facing by generation of electricity from our conventional resources, the generation of electricity from nuclear power is a must for our country. Our hydel power generation resources have almost reached their saturation point. The resources like coal for thermal power generation are fast depleting. We have always been deficient in energy resources like oil and gas. I agree with Ms Vandana that we should harness the other natural resources like the solar energy, the wind energy etc . for production of electricity. But our needs are such that the electric power from these resources can never meet our requirements. In these circumstances, the only alternative left for India, is to continue with its nuclear power programme by adopting safety measures. We must not stop a project because a mishap in it can cause loss of life and property. Every scientific project these days carries with it some or the other accompanying dangers. All this shows that we need to depend more on nuclear resources and power in the future. "Teaching is my passion and sharing knowledge is my motto"Regards,Sukhdev SinghLead Editor Forums Section

Nuclear power generation has its own security risks. As human beings we can put all security systems in place but what precautions we could take against natural calamities like what happened in Japan. Japan is one of technologically advanced countries and they could not avert the nuclear disaster consequent to the earthquake and tsunami. In my opinion India does not have better system than Japan. Therefore, in case of any nuclear disaster in India the damage would be more sever.

The basic question is, why we should depend more on nuclear energy. Why not alternative source of energy like solar, wind mills, sea waves, biogas etc. By extensive use of alternative energy we could definately reduce the use of atomic energy over a period of time. We, human beings are becoming greedy day by day. Looking for more luxuries at the cost of nature is disastrous. Whenever we go against the nature we are punished by the nature.With Regards and Best wishes,

Krishnadas

"There is no substitute for hard work"-Thomas Alva Edison-------------------------------

If we agree to go ahead with more nuclear reactors generating nuclear power and god forbid if any natural calamity happens then who will take responsibility of thousands of lives lost in such incident.It is very easy to generate and give statistics in number and respond to this discussion, but figures only don't represent precious human life and it's values.

As such India such look out for other resources to replace this dangerous nuclear power generation with least possible risk to human life, after all at the end of day what counts is safety,protection and prevention of danger to humans.

I hope at the cost of so called economic development the Government should ponder and think logically and find various other means of generating power which is safer in nature.Regards,Arvind

Thanks to all participants in this very important group discussion in view of the recent devastation of some nuclear plants in world's most developed country.

During development process of high technology or any research matters for the greater benefits of mankind there may be few cases of such unprecedented failures at the initial stages. We should not be discouraged and pessimistic on any such failures. We should learn from failures because I believe failure infuses new hopes and ideas for developing new things.

Instead of being pessimistic on any failures we must find out all sorts of lacuna, if any in the development and implementation of most powerful and ecological sources of of energy like nuclear power resource replacing step by step the traditional natural resource like very short lasting fossil fuel.

Last but not the least we must put our all efforts to protect precious human lives with development fool-proof technology for safest use of nuclear energy in world.

Government of India should immediately set up a task force in collaboration with other developed countries in the world to adopt more effective measures in construction, implementation and operation of nuclear power plants of the existing and more future requirements.

Japan is a technologically very advanced country. They are quite aware of their geographical peculiarities. Even for that reason, their reactors might have been designed to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis. But the simultaneous occurrence of an earthquake and a tsunami turned everything upside down. This crisis shows that all nuclear reactors are vulnerable to catastrophes, irrespective of any safety measures.

Experts and scientists explain what happened in Japan was not a nuclear explosion initially, but a 'chemical explosion'. The hydrogen stored caught fire. The reactors shut down safely, but the cooling process was affected. The plant was built to face quakes. But the simultaneous tsunami caused floods resulting in the shutting down of the cooling system. The waves were very high that even the scientists couldn't forsee.We all know energy is the most important pre requisite for development. All developed nations use nuclear power. A fast growing economy like India cannot keep away from using this power. But India, unlike Japan has some other possibilities too. We have sufficient water resources; coal etc. natural gas is also another option. But to speak of hydro electric projects, we have to think about the vast environmental destruction it may cause. Similarly, coal production causes great environmental pollutions. To make use of the natural gas many basic things are to be done.

So what we can do is to ensure the safety of our plants. We must review the nuclear power policy on the basis of safety and cost. Our energy requirements are also to be counted.India plans the world's largest nuclear complex in jaitapur on the konkan coast. A few others too are under construction and some others under consideration. Our nuclear energy commn authorities assert all our plants are constructed to withstand quakes. They also point out our plants a tNarora, Kakrapara and Koodamkulam aretestimonials. They were not affected by the recent quakes or tsunamis. But natural calamities are unpredictable and nobody can predict the extent of such phenomenon.

1. In the wake of the Japan tragedy we must evaluate the safety of all our plants.2. We must evaluate our capacity to defend natural calamities.3. We must have a permanent disaster management body to handle crisis.4. Our AEC, NPCIL etc swear our plants are safe. But the people must be convinced in this regard. Whatever happens, people are the victims. So a transparent public audit of the safety would be desirable.5. Govt and experts must make the local people, at least , prepared.6. A temporary ban on further new plants is required. We can have data from Japan and with that we can assess the shortcomings of our systems and can rectify them. Improvements required can also be implemented.

Our nuclear experts say that our 40 year old Tarapur Atomic Power station functions without any issues even today. Safety audits were made in 2004 and upgradations have been done. Seizmic requirements were also requalified and all other safety systems are incorporated to the current level. India also has made agreements with China etc to co operate more on the safety of plants. These are all hopeful, but govt and scientists do have the responsibility to make people convinced about the inevitability of nuclear energy and the security measures taken. We cannot forget that India was also prone to quakes and tsunami. Hence there shall not be a question of adjustments, excuses or compromises.

Hi all,Its a pleasure to see such a debatable topic but at the same time I feel quite bad that such a major disaster took place in one of the most developed and advanced country of the world.

Nuclear power is considered as the future of world's energy resources and it is true taking into account the rate of consumption of the non-renewable energy sources of the world like coal which are being utilised at a much higher pace than the desired because of the modernisation and the industrailisation of today's era.

India is also now in the list of the fastest developing countries of the world. Although it has got huge reserves of resources, still its increasing population is a major concern for the people.Nuclear power is a source of immense energy and power and harnessing it can make a country one of the most advanced and prosperous country as it wouldn't have to look for other energy resources that get used with time.

I think India can depend upon the nuclear power in future and I have reasons to support it :

Firstly, taking into account the nuclear disaster of Japan, it had strong reasons. This disaster was as a result of rare twin attack of nature as both an earthquake as well as a Tsunami struck that area. The reactor survived the earthquake as in Japan Earthquakes are quite common and so every building is designed taking into account the seismic activity only and for the reactor, it was also built as earthquake resistant. But where the japanese engineers lacked was that they ignored the fact that the reactor was built near the sea and there were 100% chances of any Tsunami like situation triggered by earthquakes and this is one of the most important lesson that the world learnt from their mistake.

Secondly, India is a large growing country and soon it needs to find out some alternative for its energy source and nuclear energy being a strong contender needs to be given another thought. I don't think the world stops progressing if in the path of development some failure is witnessed, on the other hand failures have been the most important lessons for the world since times.This failure also gives us a lot to learn and so if implemented properly, India can also opt for nuclear energy provided it takes into account the danger it can pose on the country if not treated with caution.

Hence I would like to conclude with saying that if we have to deal with something dangerous we should be two steps ahead of the danger so that we extract the fullest from that.RegardsAkshayPay no heed to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !

India is a very fast emerging country. India is rapidly increasing their power sources and Nuclear power energy is the largest source of energy after water energy and renewable sources of energy like sunlight and wind energy.

According to me to get something you have to loose something. Nuclear energy is very much needed for the internal development of a country. If we talk about the current news of the misfortune happened in Japan after the Tsunami and earth quake, some of the nuclear stations were destroyed and some of them are in critical case.

Natural disaster can come at any time anywhere, we are not be able to predict it. We are human beings we can minimize the effect of disaster.

India is going to plan some more power stations and this is a very good sign for development. I suggest only that take some necessary steps to minimize the effect if any misfortune happened in the future.

We need to check on the constructive side of adopting to other positive means of generating power and minimise the destructive side or ill effects of relying on nuclear reactors for nuclear power generation.

We all know India is economically advancing and lot of innovations has happened in field of research and development,so why not harness and employ safer norms and strategies to review and plan for other means of power generation like solar,thermal,hydel or via wind energy for such.

India is mature and responsible country and may God bless our motherland with more conservative sources of energy and people with right intellect to decide whether it is really feasible to go ahead with live and open disasters of the future.

Save the people of India in right context rather than forcing initiatives which can destroy mankind.Regards,Arvind

Let us review the various aspects of nuclear energy before arriving at any such conclusion.Nuclear energy is mostly used as a renewable source of energy for the production of electricity as a small amount of a radioactive substance, under controlled situations releases a huge amount of energy which is not possible with any other sources. Though, only 2% of the world's energy consumption is fulfilled by nuclear energy, there is an increasing movement against its expansion. It is believed that energy demand for India alone is going to rise by 225% by 2025 AD when we shall have very little reserves for coal, and forests left at our disposal.

Now, you may say what is the harm in the use of this type of energy. Yes, there is a harm and the harm is such that your entire generations or prodigy may suffer. Let us see the harms:

i) Nuclear energy, if left uncontrolled can pollute the environment with contamination radiation leaving the food and water unsuitable for drinking and eating.

ii) It is said that excess of nuclear radiations and dust released into the atmosphere forms a cloud over the atmosphere which does not allow the sunlight to penetrate the earth's surface. This may abnormally increase the cold condition over the entire region to less than the freezing point of water. This condition is also called the "nuclear winter" ans may persist for long durations. You might be aware that India has decided to send 2 tons of blankets to Fukushima as the temperature there fell below -20C.

iii) The waste material left after the degradation of Uranium is also radioactive in nature which is generally buried in the deep layers of the land or the ocean. Wherever, they are buried the remain as before harming the local ecosystem of that place.

iv)Radiations has two fold impacts on human body:

Genetic effects: It includes changes in the chromosomal pattern of human body causing Mongolism etc.

Somatic effects such as "leukemia" or blood cancer and other psychological impacts.

We have now reviewed the different impacts of the nuclear energy but don't you think that we are already aware of these facts but why were we sleeping only to awake after the disaster has struck our brothers in Japan.we have definitely signed various nuclear deals where we pledge to use it for peaceful purposes. But does these peaceful purpose indicates the eternal peace ad solace to mankind in the form of death. No, we can never be stronger than nature whose love and care we could never achieve, no matter even if we achieved the greatest heights of this mortal world. I think I am getting more philosophical and let us now return to the motion of the debate or group discussion, whatever you want to call it for it is the same for the people in Japan as it all seems useless to them.

It is clear from the topic that India should think upon the issue whether it should depend more on nuclear energy or some other. I am clearly with the members who are against this source, citing the reasons I mentioned above. I don't understand why we want to bring our destruction even if we have so many other alternatives in the form of tidal energy, ocean thermal energy conversion, wind energy, solar energy, biomass energy etc.It is really foolish to develop nuclear energy for saving money and conventional fossil fuels at the cost of lives of our citizens that are believed to be the greatest assets of a country. Imagine if Albert Einstein have died at the age of fourteen due to any such nuclear disaster. What shall we have done without electricity then. the world would have been denied of many such great inventions.Think upon this till the time I post again with some solutions to this problems.

With regards,Vivek ISC Editor.Studyvillage editor.

A group of donkey led by a lion can defeat a group of lion led by a donkey.

Hi,In the wake of Fukushima incident the disaster of Chernobil come into rememberance. While the Chernobil incidents was happened that time also a debate on the safety and security of the nuclear power plant was raises. But time is going ahead, so the civilization. More and more naturally available energy sources is being utilized in the sequenceof their coplexcity to extract. More they are complex, more energy, more chance of disaster.Now the requirement of India is power, power and power. All othersources are available inplenty to bring a industrial revolution.So for the faster devlopment and to compete with the rest of the world the power sector need the boost of nuclear energy.As far as indian source is concernonly the Thorium is naturally available in Kerala. But till now it has not beenusedas a reactor fuel. So India is totally depend upon the supply of enrich Urenium from Russia, USA, France etc.Safety is the big concern because the Alpha, Beta and Gamma, Nutron if released in air due to any damage then it can destroy a vast area. Its like a nuclear bomb.It is all in the theory. But if you go to the actual operation they are far more safe than the conventional. The safety system, cooling system, disaster management of our reactor is very very strongand the chance of any accident is almost nil. The safety system is so auto designed that a operator also can not do a mistake. So they are very safe.The safety fromthe waste of nuclear plant is a big concern. The team of waste management scientists of BARC are monitoring and organising all the waste management in all plant of India. The warning and monitoring system of our reactors are so strong that it can measure even 100th parts of micro Rontgen.Though India is less prone to the earthquake, the plants are mostly situated in the Sunami and earthquake prone area like Chennai, Mumbai.It is a cause of concern. But if there is so devastating disaster then either way the people will suffer. So in my point it is not necessary to eat on the earth fearing the thief will steal the utensils.Wecan not contain the disaster by the international boundary. Our naboughring countries are devloping these things, so if there is a disaster that will affect us too. So it will be foolness to not use the nuclear energy.In Japan or other Uropean country due to the shortage of employee and population the plants are mostly runs unattended or by few attender. But in India they are well maintained and attended so safe to run always.All the reactors of India are PWR, which are less prone to overheat or disaster.Western countries are dumping the niclear waste in open sea or in the continental self of India. It any way effecting the public health. But due to the inability to take up the issue by our government we are suffering. So any way you can not keep youself safe from all these things and so better live with it with efficiently using its benefits.At the last I can say it is the age of globalisation and power. So let it be safe or unsafe we have to live with this. As far as the design is concern the reactors are cent percent safe to use.ThanksSousil"More love in life can ruin the life"

India has become one of the few nuclear power countries after clearing many hurdles in its way. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had put the future of his government at stake in 2008 to strike a nuclear deal with the USA. India has already spent thousands of crores of rupees to develop her nuclear programme. How can it be advisable for shelving our nuclear programme at this stage giving the instance of a nuclear disaster in Japan? Japan is fully dependent on nuclear power for its power generation and has become the world's third largest economy. Japan took to nuclear power generation well knowing the fact that it suffered the world's greatest loss of human lives and property because of the dropping of atom bombs on its cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. If Japan had had stopped or not initiated its nuclear programme after the Second World War, it would have never achieved the economic progress as it did. If India takes this disastrous step of stopping her nuclear programme giving in an instance of Japan's disaster, it would be her greatest folly.

Secondly, the natural environment and location of India is different from Japan. Japan is a country which always suffers from earthquakes and Tsunamis. Moreover, no country can predict a natural calamity of such high intensity. No country can stop its nuclear or other dangerous projects due to the fear of a natural disaster which it cannot predict. It is not only in nuclear disasters that we lose life and property. This can take place in any of our development projects, our research establishments and even in services like railways, airways and waterways. Should we stop these projects and services fearing a natural disaster? Every part of our country is running short of electric power. There are shut downs for industry. The pumps irrigating our fields cannot be run without electricity. There is a power cut in almost every part of the country. There are constructions taking place in thousand of numbers which will need electric power. It is obvious that these power requirements cannot be met from our conventional resources which are depleting day by day. The non-conventional energy resources like the sun and wind energy cannot meet our requirements. So the only alternative left for us is to develop our nuclear power resources in order to fulfil the ever increasing needs of our industry, agriculture, transport, household and other sectors.Regards,

I don't think development of Nuclear power plants in India is bad for any reason.

Mam, if we talk about the misfortune happened in Japan last week, we can see all the things happened suddenly, without any knowledge. We cannot predict the game of nature.

Natural disaster can come anywhere anytime no one can stop this.Development of technology is very much necessary for every emerging country, this gives the country an internal strength.With Regards,Ajay

India is still a developing country. To become a developed country india cannot stand upon its only resource as agriculture. There are many sectors such as automobiles , raw material processing industries , industrial equipment production industries etc. Such industries must be supplied with a lot of power and raw materials. Although we have raw material but we are losing it on the power supply front. Even in rural area of india we still see no lights. People have stopped complaining about and are starting to live a life without depending on the government. So why we are not able to supply sufficient power?.

It is because the requirement is too high where as the supply is too low. India has not only got mineral ores underneath the earth's crust but also has got much more nuclear fuel. So why don't we use it to make ourselves better and live happily. The only fear is that india is not ready to take nuclear rain or any disaster related to high radioactivity. But i say we have already taken a precaution. We have located the nuclear plants far away from cities and towns. The power the nuclear fuel provides does the better or our country only. Also india has signed a treaty on not using the nuclear fuel as arms or ammunition's. So for a country like india it is better to use the nuclear fuel available and harness it to maximum extent. For future development based on the geo location the nuclear plant has to be placed. The positioning of nuclear plant should be such that it should be not near any fault line of the earth and far away from any habitations and should have access to emergency procedures.

From some of the replies above i learned that solar and wind power is the better alternatives for nuclear fuel. But i say can you provide solar cells and panels for industries and large factories and can you provide wind mills for ever factories need. Wind cannot blow every where equally we can provide wind mills in either sea's or in hilly areas also we cannot shift industries near by. Although the cost of production is cheap but we have some limitations doing it. And solar cells are not cheap and the power generated is seasonal. In monsoon season we rarely see sun and the energy generated by then is fairly less. I think these may not be the options for a developing country to reach a state of developed country. Most of the developed countries harness nuclear power. With india striving to get a seat in security council it should also start using nuclear fuel for its future.

If nuclear power is in safe hands and is harnessed to its utmost extent then we can definitely overcome power crisis. And make our future secure without depending on other countries for equipments we want.

Scientists of other countries are working hard to get nuclear fission process in control. This source is the ultimate one it can provide a lot of energy for future. Within say some fifty year there will be a nuclear fission reactor which would provide an unimaginable amount of energy with a small amount of fuel. So india should not take a step back towards nuclear energy harnessing otherwise we would never be a developed country. After 20 years we started to use nuclear energy as source of energy, when all the countries had gone ahead with some future modifications for efficient harnessing of energy. So it is time for india to change and identify itself on the global scenario.

So you think this should be done at the cost of human lives? Is human life so cheap that we go ahead with this mindless acts of generating nuclear energy ignoring other possible safer means knowing the disasterous outcome which is a live bomb ticking always.Regards,Arvind

Anything and everything can become dangerous if not planned and executed without due care. To take utmost care is what is needed.The radiation started in Japan reached in US, China and some other countries. If the situation continues it may reach even more countries. In this state of affairs where can we find this 'security'? Leave the nuclear explosion and radiation. What causes the earthquakes and tsunamis frequent? Is it not the mankind itself who is primarily responsible for such mishaps? When will he stop destructing nature and when will we he start learning to respect mother nature?The responses of nature are mysterious and unpredictable. All natural forces are extremely powerful. Man and his inventions are nothing in front of nature. Noone can withstand the fury of it.

India is a cultural based country. It has many religions, languages of varied type but with a unity in the principles. Our country has ethical value rather than in any other countries. We have puranas with lessons from the evil thinking and evil actions like Ravana, Dhuryodhana etc.

we have studied the results of evils from the history of Ramayana, Mahabaratha, evil activities done against Lord Jesus, Mohammed Nabi etc.,

If we study the history concentratedly, we can realise the results of evils.

Morover, our panchasheel principle laided by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru is to be remembered while thinking about the Nuclear applications. We have to study the good and evils of the nuclear. I hope there are dangerousness than usefulness in the nuclear applications - that too for our country.

Hi,You can not gain anything if you do not take risk. The mass devlopment of a country can be achieved only if some of them is ready to sacrifice something. Here we arenot sacrificing human life. As I said the nuclear plants are 100 times safer than the conventional. The radiation level inside these plants are less than the naturally available level or less than what we get from cosmic energy. They are autocontrolled and thoundas of safety protections are fitted in these plants.In my opinion those who are opposing the nuclear plant first should read and learn about this and then personally check the plants.Can you avoid a natural disaster? Are not there more number of people dying everyday by eating more, drinking alcohol, starving, road accident, flood, earthquake, cigrette and so on? Can we stop all these things? No. We start living with this.This is like a new married couple, They dont know each other perfectly and horrified by reading the news that in somewhere some newly married husband kills the bride. Itis also like that. After sometime of togetherness it will give good benefitslike child.ThanksSousil"More love in life can ruin the life"

While we are sitting in our homes sipping a cup of tea under the cool breeze of fans or an AC, scores of carcasses are found buried under the sea or the land in Japan. Most of the members are of the opinion that nuclear explosion at the reactors were responsible for casualties but they are wrong as the plants did not cause it directly. Remember it was the earthquake and the tsunami that brought about destruction and there is least we can do in this regard. I feel that the casualties would have been the same even if there were no nuclear plants. Instead we must praise the courage of all those workers and scientists who even risked their life for cooling the reactors and they were successful to a great extent.

The fault with the mankind does not lie in setting up such plants but rather in the mishandling and mismanagement of such reactors. Let me give you an example. When there was a proposal in th second half of the 80's to introduce computers in India, there was a storm of protests regarding the unemployment it shall cause. Many other gave various excuses as to the ill effects of this machine but see how are we benefited by it today. Can we ever think of our life without the usage of computers though it has several disadvantages. In the same way, nuclear plants re very dangerous, no doubt, but if we learn to take care of certain precautions and safety measures, we shall definitely do good to mankind. Here are some of the safety measures that should be entertained:

Protection for the workers: The workers working in the reactors must be adequately protected. they must have air filters so that they do not inhale the particles directly. Exhaust systems can also be used for the same purpose. They must also wear lead aprons as lead stops the penetration of the alpha and beta particles.

Proper storage: Radioactive materials such as uranium and plutonium must be stored in thick lead containers due to the reason I mentioned above.

Exposure limits: Exposure to the radiations for the different workers must be prescribed as per the distance form the source, time for which they are exposed and their health conditions. regular screening must be performed to know the extent to which one has been exposed.

Proper degradation: Waste material left after the process must be properly buried inside the deep layers of land or sea away from the residential areas. Nowadays, even the byproduct can be processed to yield more uranium that can again be used. In other words, it should be recycled.

Other alternatives: We must not completely rely on nuclear energy but also develop other sources such as wind energy, tidal energy and solar energy that are much cheaper and safer.

Provisions for any mishap: In case, there is any mishap there must be proper provisions for safety of all. Evacuation routes must be prepared and sheds can be built as an immediate measure. There must be proper and uninterrupted supply of cold water in order to cool down the hot reactors. All the unused material must be transported to safer places away from the reactors so that they do not start releasing radiations due to excess heat.

I have definitely listed some of the measures that can be practically arrives at. I shall request the other members to do the same instead of stating the dangerous impacts. We can definitely think of some more ideas and points so that we can be safe in case of any natural peril.

With regards,Vivek ISC Editor.Studyvillage editor.

A group of donkey led by a lion can defeat a group of lion led by a donkey.

Thanks God! Extensive damages along with harmful radiation effects of Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster due to unprecedented earthquake is being successfully controlled by Japan Government boosting confidence and faith of peoples of Japan and all other countries of world.

We hope that being one of the economically strongest country of the world Japan Government will soon recover their losses caused by natural calamity.

After the devastating effects of Fukushima nuclear power plant India should be careful to ensure proper quake proof installation, maintenance and operation of all the present and future nuclear power plants.

Action program

To ensure safety in nuclear power plants operation the following action program should be taken the administration and engineers with immediate effect to avoid recurrence of such devastation in India:

• Routine preventive maintenance and testing of all critical equipment of the nuclear power plants to ensure safety.

• Nuclear reactor generate tremendous temperature to heat water in boiler for steam generation to run turbine connected to the generators. Continuous flow of coolant is essential within the reactor by running high capacity pumps connected by separate diesel generators as secondary source in case of failure or shutdown of primary source in the power plant.

• Major maintenance of the nuclear reactors in each unit of the plants should be carried out at least half-yearly through alternate shut down of the each unit plant, if necessary replacing uranium sticks inside the nuclear oven.

• Maintenance personnel and engineers of the nuclear power plants in India should undergo training programs for updated maintenance system of all equipments of the power plants for safe operation.

For future growth of India we will depend on bulk electricity power which can be produced by nuclear power plants meeting all types of consumer demands.

With a population that has broken all records, India does need Nuclear Programmes to ensure that it becomes a super power. One can easily perceive the pathetic state of India in terms of energy production and energy consumption. India has to go through a revolution in energy generation which can only be possible through nuclear programmes.

What happened in Japan is a disaster. It feels terrible and horrific, however, India can benefit from the incident by learning better ways of securing and managing the Nuclear Plants. Nuclear Plants, till the tsunami occured were thought to be safe and calamity resistant, however, Japan will have to come with new and better ways to secure them which I am sure they will be able to do. I do not think that there is any other country as disciplined and dedicated as Japan.

I do not say that the Nuclear Plants are very safe in India but is there anything in this world from one part of the globe to another that does not have its risks. Flying is not safe, driving is not completely safe, sitting in front of the computer for hours is not good but here we are going through all of them. I believe that Nuclear Plants in India should not be shut down under any circumstances. They are the future of India- a ticket to India becoming a Super Power.

The nuclear crisis in Japan at its apex almost out of control, its worsening situation has led to evacuation over several thousand people from the areas near the nuclear plants. This has made the nations worldwide to assess the strategy how will be it safe in the wake of natural calamity as Japan is now facing. India too obviously has been under that pressure of evaluating the strategies of present and upcoming nuclear plants, for example, proposed largest nuclear power plant at Jaitapur in Maharashtra state.

The most important strategy is about safety of nuclear plants during disasters and we should see that the nuclear plants have been out of seismically active zone, but Jaitapur plant is very much in the area of substantial seismic activity and it is time for India to learn a lesson from nuclear crisis of Japan though being one of the world's largest economy, unable to tackle the situation as technology could not withstand nature's fury.

I agree with Vandana's response earlier and I would like to go with solar energy being abundant in nature in India, though it might be a bit expensive, but nuclear power is neither cheap nor safe. Moreover, we have sufficient natural resources like bio plants and thermal and this is the high time to focus on these resources instead of concentrating on dreadful nuclear affecting generation as a whole and we have already witnessed a Bhopal tragedy.

Hi,@ Mr Arvind,You are taking into account only one side of the coin. Setting up of Nuclear power plants doesn't mean endangering human life. The disaster that struck Japan was a rare case of twin disaster attacks while in normal cases and conditions we rarely see such mis happenings. Their is difference between Japan and other countries of the world in terms of geographical conditions and seismic activity. The location of Japan is major drawback to its development but still it is one of the most technologically advanced countries of the world and this distinction is a rare feat and an awesome example of hardwork and dedication which has been shown by the Japanese so far.

We must take a lesson from them as we are not yet in such bad condition that every other day we face an earthquake and still we are so far behind a nation that even received the first Atomic attack in history and got two of its cities completely devastated in an instant.

So we must not refrain from development in the name of any impending danger but we should be far more protective against any such fear so that not only we progress but we progress in all fields while taking care of national security as well.

Hence we shouldn't refrain from such a huge energy potential source just because it may cause disasters because disasters can't be prevented but we can just prepare ourselves for any such condition so that we don't suffer much.RegardsAkshayPay no heed to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !

I strongly agree Vivek chowdhury.True that if we cannot manage the nuclear waste(which also emits radiations) and it causes the health hazards like Genetic effects and Somatic effects such as "leukemia" or blood cancer and other psychological impacts. Some health problems are incurable. We don't have any right to trouble the life of future generation if natural calamity happens and causes such incident.

Though it is not advisable to have the reactors in a high intensity tremor zone. A well maintained modern Nuke reactor (maintained according to international standards) can be turned off immediately after tremors are known to occur by merely inserting all ctrl rods and speeding up the cooling process. time to time checkups & emergency drills can go a long away in safe handling.

India needs nuke power too. But, it should restrict usage of it to non-seismic zones only.

However, there is dire need for power and alternative energy is still too expensive for the third world.Unless a PPP model is setup for this alternative energy will take another decade or require a very patriotic initiative to implement the same. India too must involve in alternative energy research to develop cheaper means.

To the question, "Is it safe for India to depend more on Nuclear power energy in the future?", I would say No nuclear plants are not safe at all.

All of us are aware of the fact that a single nuclear reaction produces much more energy than what we can get from any natural source. Thus if a nuclear reactor explodes the disaster will also be much higher.

Ours is highly populated country. Thus,if any thing like what happened in Japan happens in our country the destruction caused would be many folds more.

But here I would also like to ask, is it correct to loose such high energy producing plants just because of the fear of destruction in future? It is just not right to think that what has happened in Japan, would also happen in India. Risks are everywhere. Even in our household chores there are several things which may cause huge damages. Say for e.g. the LPG cylinders, none of us are unaware of the Bhopal gas tragedy. But have we stopped using LPG because its risky? Then why based on other country's experience we should discontinue using nuclear power.

As Mr.Chakravarthi has said above, Japan is more prone to earthquakes and in India our power plants(nuclear) are not situated in high seismic zones.

So I feel instead of being afraid our government should work on improving the protection of the nuclear power plants.Thanks & Regards,Akanksha P.VLead Editor(Ask Expert)

India is fully geared to enter the twenty first century. We in India can look forward to a comfortable and settled in the twenty first century. A developed country must have the atomic energy to protect the country. But it should be planted safely. On May 18, 1974 India conducted its first explosion in Pokharan, Rajasthan. After a period of 24 years India again conducted another two atomic explosions on 11 and 13 of May 1998. India has emerged as strong member among the nuclear power nations. In our country, there are 6 nuclear power plants at present and a number of nuclear power plants are under construction. To cope up with the developed countries, these power plants are playing a vital role in the generation of atomic power. But these nuclear power plants and the reactor should be kept safely. We should get experience form the recent incident of Fukushima, Japan. The question comes frequently that how the Fukushima reactor got the fire ring? As the earthquakes often hit Japan, the scientist of Japan prepared the reactor according to their earthquake condition. That mean the reactor can tolerate the earthquakes. But the Fukushima was under the tsunami water, which disable the generator system and this activate the power to nuclear reactors. This is happened because of the ocean as it is too close to the city. Whether our reactors are safe or not? As far as I feel it is yes, like Japan, India does not face the regular earthquake and India has not constructed any reactor within the area of high seismic zone.

Any way in the fast developing modern world all countries should be very much careful about the safety. Science is the key of success and the key of disaster also. Developments are necessary but it should not at the cost of the country people.

Well, after reading the posts of most of the members, I have come to opinion that most members are completely against nuclear energy but it is a wrong notion according to me. I strongly feel that nuclear energy must be developed but with certain precautions. Let me give you the causes of a nuclear disaster;

Negligence: Negligence on the part of the staff members and the workers can be one of the cause of a disaster. If the workers are not careful enough in handling and managing or even transporting the nuclear raw material such as uranium or plutonium, it may cause a serious accident. This was the case with Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster when the engineers forgot to turn off the reactors even if they were overheated.

Technical failure: There may be certain technical failure in the vast plant. This may be controlled by properly designing the plants and the reactors and repairing them regularly.

The first two reasons are definitely under our control but the third reason is just beyond our means and power. Japan has been managing its nuclear plants well but it was helpless when the disaster struck. There is nothing we can do in this regard. Should we then not develop nuclear energy just for the fear of what might happen in future and neglecting the welfare of the present generation?

There are numerous loopholes in democracy such as corruption, delay in taking decisions etc. but we cannot neglect its benefits and advantages it has over monarchy. This is the reason why we have adopted democracy in almost the entire world. In the same way, we cannot neglect the benefits that nuclear energy possess. Let me give you some of the benefits of nuclear energy:

Renewable: We have definitely vast reserves of radioactive materials, in the Monazite sands of Goa from where Thorium is extracted. Nuclear energy, unlike coal and petroleum is renewable in nature and hence, shall not deplete in few years.

Less pollution: Nuclear energy as compared to the coal energy and petroleum emits a lesser amount of effluents and gases into the atmosphere. Only, we re concerned about its disposal.

Potential for vast energy supply: Nuclear energy can definitely solve the energy crisis in the world as a small amount of uranium can release a huge amount of heat energy that is used to convert water into steam which in turn is utilized to drive a turbine connected to a generator. Both the processes, nuclear fusion and nuclear fission can be used for the purpose.

Finally, I shall like to say that one should not have an opinionated mind. Be positive and think about the positive aspects while trying to avoid its negative consequences.

With regards,Vivek ISC Editor.Studyvillage editor.

A group of donkey led by a lion can defeat a group of lion led by a donkey.

India is full of energy, it has the good resource of coal and so, we are producing thermal energy.Most of produced electrical energy comes from coal.But soon after next 25 or 30 years there will be the crisis of coal to produce electricity by thermal power plant and has not such kind of resource for water power plant which can't fulfill such a huge demand. So only thing we have left is ATOMIC POWER PLANT.

Since from 1945 all the developed countries like America,England, Russia, China ,etc have the tendency to make nuke bomb and make their countries more powerful and more safe and secure. In fact they are constructing nuke plant more stronger for what? Because of to make their mastery into the whole world. And in that situation India can't be silent, we know we do not want to do any mastery but someone do mastery with us that is intolerable.

India is such a country whose neighbours are her arch-rivals.Yes, I'm talking about China and Pakistan. Both have the nuke bomb and in this situation will we stopped? Certainly not. If for future's disaster we are tempted thinking that thousands of people will die because of nuclear disaster, then you must think that after two years billions people will loose their freedoms. Are you ready to accept slavery once again? I think you must not. But that doesn't mean we will careless for that upcoming disaster.

Rather we should take some steps to prevent that type of disasters. We have to think all the possibilities that how it will appeared and then solve it. If somebody says 'no one can presume how the disaster comes'. Then I also say to him 'Yes, certainly, so how can you think that without nuclear bomb or nuclear plant you would not have to face disasters?' Japan would not have to face nuke disaster if tsunami & earth quake did not happened. And Japan had not also proper construction of being a regular-erath quake country. So, this destruction makes India also aware. And India is not country like Japan. But one time It may be and thus we need some kind of sincere steps to prevent this situation.

If someone said that the effect of nuke plant spreads a huge contamination in our environment then I have to said the only thing is to plant tree to get rid of that. Nothing else can make.

So, in spite of some critical issues about the nuke usability is very much required.

These are some indirect benefits for you, these are the issues of mankind,and your country etc.

But here I am talking about direct issue for you, I know that it is not such issue like those but still it has a x factor.You have to pay electric bill costly and day by day it is being costlier.But whenever nuke plant stalled then you will not have to pay electric bill as costly as now, in fact it will be cut down.

Ok most of the members are in for having nuclear power energy in India,but I stand by my statement of being against such an idea or opinion. Having to read the above opinions of various persons who are for it,I can just read into figures and various recuperative effects and ways to manage such disasters,but I also want to state that by doing such we are neglecting the other main sources of energy as well for example water which is in abundance whenever rainfall and in catchment areas and the safest bet for the future generations as well.Our Government can invest into more hydel power plants which are less environment causing dangers.

The main thing I personally was worried was for the people of our nation and not about just one or two individuals which was argued by one of esteemed members by giving as example of tragedy which can happen in the kitchen by using gas cylinder,kindly wake up and think about future disasters which can happen and lead to various side effects which can be enormous in terms of life lost and radiation effects which can lead to severe serious health problems.

The above can also be reversed if our public and our Government think about various other objectives of generating power through more safer means which can bring happiness to future generations of our nation.We are not so economically backward that we have to rely on nuclear reactors to generate nuclear power.

Thanks to all members for their valued suggestions and ideas putting across their point by validating and justifying their statements in a very competitive way.Regards,Arvind

Hi all,@ Mr Arvind,I agree with you to some extent that other sources should also be nourished and used to harness energy and rightly said that water is quite abundant in our country but there is something that I want to remind you. While living in such a large and diverse country with really varying geographical conditions we can't just sit back on two to three so called environment friendly sources this is because India can't survive on limited resources it surely has to look forward for alternatives.Nuclear waste is really hazardous but if disposed properly, there isn't any harm to people or environment. Nuclear radiation leakage is also harmful but if we take efficient care about the location, design and all the other factors that may lead to leakage we can surely prevent it.

Hence its not like we shed away from an important source just on the basis that it may harm.

Talking of other forms, Hydel power plants are very costly to built and moreover maintain. We see so many dams break and devour populations instantaneously. That is also a hazard only. Also the energy we get from it is although more than many other sources but still the output is not so high and such plants can't be used in many industries and factories as it requires high investment.

What I want to convey is that it is true that we can look forward for sources but that doesn't mean that we ignore those that we are capable of harnessing properly and which require nothing but some more caution in handling.Hence, India should not turn its back towards nuclear energy just for the reason that it caused harm to some other nation but it should on the other hand prove itself in front of all by managing this source most efficiently.RegardsAkshayPay no heed to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !

@ Mr.ArvindIn my arguments I have mentioned in the begining that even I agree that nuclear plants are not safe.I totally agree with you that there are other natural sources of energy productions which can be brought to utilization.

By giving the example of gas cylinders i just wanted to put up my other point i.e we cannot just sit back because of fear. If you talk about the crores of people I would like to remind that in Bhopal Gas tragedy there were somewhere around 15,000 victims of which around 2,259 was immediate death toll recorded. So its not a matter of just a couple of individuals.

Looking to it in a similar way as the disaster in Japan, we should have just stopped the production of LPG Gas cylinders after the Tragedy of 1984.

So I personally feel it would be really good if we donot rely on nuclear reactors but it is also not wise to say that we should simply eradicate the use of nuclear power after what Japan has faced. In my opinion it was a co-incidence that the disaster struck the reactor there. If it would have not been the reactor, it might have been something else.Thanks & Regards,Akanksha P.VLead Editor(Ask Expert)

What a response from the learned members? The reactions and counter reactions and the chain reactions as a whole? Quite overwhelmingly, I am taken in after reading them all.Very informative and knowledgeable too! Kudos to the man who picks up the topics and throws that towards us, watching the clashes of titans all the while. I cannot restrain myself from entering into the fray while the going is so good.

After Chernobyl, the world's most dreaded nuclear disaster has raised a big question mark on whether to go ahead furtherwards with the ongoing Indian nuclear power programmes on the strengths of imported foreign reactors?

The problem with the Indian nuclear import is that these are not being carried out under a well planned and thought out policy. Through the medium of this, the Indo American nuclear deal is being visited upon in a huff to merely oblige France, America and Russia. In a most irresponsible way, (which is quite typical of the government of the day, as also is evident to all, through the WikiLeaks revelations, on the note for vote politics), without observing any competitive auctioning procedures, one of the nuclear park for each four of the foreign companies has been made reserved(Only for some hideous secret exchanges).

The greatest of the leak related to Indian nuclear security is that India stands duty bound after the nuclear deal seal to import such reactors which never have been ever tested in any country of the world. This includes the 1630 megawatt uranium pressurised reactor (EPR) of Areva Company and 1520 megawatt economic simplified (Boiling Water Reactor) by General Electric Hitachi. Both these companies have not yet got the US Design certificate. Imports of such untested reactors are full of disastrous consequences. GE, in 1960, had sold off to India the proto type of BWR and based on this very designs had sold reactors to Fukushima Nuclear Plant too, radiation through which is still continuing and Japanese scientists are finding it hard to contain it.

What I am trying to aim at by detailing the above facts is that thinking of securing the Indian nuclear security by being dependent on the foreign imported fuel, that also by adopting doubtful means of auctioning for reasons well known, is bound to pose the dangers of a great nuclear security threat together with a colossal waste of public money. There is every possibility that the corrupt shall pocket in thick wads of currencies throwing all norms of security concerns to wind.

It is quite ludicrous to discuss the safety norms or the alternative sources of power energy on the face of the facts when the purchaser and the seller both have developed a very sweet but immoral relationship with each other to earn green bucks throwing into lurch the security concerns and its cataclysmic consequences.

There is no alternative whatsoever as of now which can replace the nuclear powered energy. So goes the saying that when you cannot swim against the waves, swing along with it. For time being, we too shall have to swim along with the existing scheme of things of nuclear waves wafting the world over.We don't have the capabilities of being an exception when the big brothers are finding an alternative to the burning issue quite beyond their capabilities. But making amends is certainly in our hands. And that we can do- should do.

Before importing reactors worth billions of crores of dollars, what India needs to do is to prepare an integrated blueprint of the entire gamut of nuclear policy which should chiefly encompass the security aspects first. Why not we rely more on our Deshi fuel – thorium and bid a good bye to the foreign imports? Thorium is found in abundance through out our country. Why the government perpetually remain adamant on importing everything we can do without? Right from the needle to wheat to onions to not to least speak the nuclear reactors? I think you all know the answers to the big question, don't you, pals?*

Most of the members are raising their voices for hydel energy and wind energy. But don;t you think that even these two sources of energy have many drawbacks that have put a question on their use. Let me explain you some of the demerits of the two alternatives.Demerits of hydel energy

Ecologically disastrous: When the government wants to build a multipurpose projects such as a dam, thousands of acres of lands have to cleared and other thousands also submerges. This leads to the vast extinction of flora and fauna of the region. Narmada Bachao Andolan raised a storm of protests from the common people, lead by Medha Patekar, as they were all aware of the disastrous effects of a dam. This lead the government to ultimately forfeit the operation.

Helpful in worsening a disaster: Suppose an earthquake strikes a area and cause leakage in the dam that sores tons of gallons of water or the flood causes the pressure in dam such that government is forced to takes steps such as releasing the water. This shall drown the whole village and spoil the whole agricultural land. Millions of people have already been displaced in some famous known cases of such dams failure.

Now, how can you blame the nuclear energy for being the only cause of worst disasters.Speaking of wind energy, the supply of wind is not constant all the time and even all the regions do not receive sufficient wind. How can you then expect wind energy to solve the problem of energy crisis. If you want so, there will be lots of power failures in the industrial sector as well as agricultural sector, which means food insecurity and less production, which in turn will lead to lesser income, lesses capital formation, lesser exports, unfavorable BOP, slow economic growth and in summation, we will be heading towards another colonism period which shall again ensure another 300 long years of national fight for independence.

I think i have really exaggerated on the topic but the consequences I mentioned are not improbable. Nuclear energy can alone save us from this situation. What shall you desire now? I think I am not a good debater if I have not been able to stand my point and influence you from the four responses. But to know the exact answer, you need to read the responses of all the members with a free mind and then think over the matter again. As I said above, do not be of opinionated mind. Be ready to grasp the ideas of others if they are valuable. I hope that at the end of this discussion, we arrive at a positive answer with good reasons to favor this nuclear energy.

With regards,Vivek ISC Editor.Studyvillage editor.

A group of donkey led by a lion can defeat a group of lion led by a donkey.

This is a very nice topic to discuss.According to many members India should not depend on nuclear energy and some of the member are thinking in a negative way that India should depend upon these energy sources

According to me India should depend upon these sources of energy but not fully depend upon these sources of energy because they are not at all safe. We are also having examples that nuclear energy is becoming a danger for the existence of humans. Like Tsunami and earth quake makes some nuclear reactors to leak some radiation, this makes everyone think that Nuclear reactors are not at all safe for use they can only be used a additional source of Energy.

The use of renewable source of energy should be maximized and use of Nuclear energy should be minimized.With Regards,Kritika

India has got many natural resources such as fossil fuel, plenty of river and rain catchment area, wind power in surrounding coaster areas, and natural gas for running prime movers in generating stations to produce electricity.

But all the above resources are not sufficient for bulk production of electricity to meet present and future consumer demands in fast growing industrialization and modern life style of peoples of India.

All the developed countries of the world are producing bulk electricity power through pollution free nuclear power plants for the bulk consumer demands in addition to traditional sources of energy available in their countries.

Scientists, researchers and engineers are working day and night for safety and protection of human lives against such unforeseen incidence of non-ionized radiation effects from Fukushima nuclear power plants in Japan.

It will be possible to combat such wide spread radiation effects to endanger human lives in future as I believe that "Necessity is the mother of invention".

The day is not far off when people of India will enjoy the greater benefits of nuclear power plants for better living style like other developed countries of the world.

With this I am concluding my views in this present issue of group discussion.

From the above responses, I feel there are few people who are thinking that depending on nuclear power is a negative approach. To this I would like to clarify that we are not saying that India should totally depend on nuclear power. Its just that we(atleast I am) are saying that using nuclear energy to produce power is not that bad approach also.

I totally agree with Mr. Jayanta that our country's demand for power can not only be met by the use of natural energy sources like hydel power or wind energy. We need huge amounts of production of electricity to lighten up the houses of every citizen,be it in a metropolitan city or in a small village in the rural areas.

To meet up this huge requirement we need the support of nuclear energy also.

Also I too feel that our scientist and researchers are capable enough to find some or the other solution regarding the protection of the nuclear power plants after this tragic episode of radiation leak in Fukushima,Japan.Thanks & Regards,Akanksha P.VLead Editor(Ask Expert)

Due to the tremendous nuclear disaster in Japan, the question really stands as to whether the advantages of nuclear energy would outweigh its disadvantages. Although there has been tremendous loss due to Tsunami in Japan, still the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board has issued a statement stating that they are very much confident regarding the safety of Indian reactors and also due to the advanced facilities, they feel that India would never face a threat as that of Japan.Although most of such nuclear disasters have occurred in developed countries, our mind still remains in a dilemma as to whether there is a 100% surety that no such failure would occur in the nuclear reactors.

We could recollect the Tsunami waves that touched the Kalpakkam plant in the year 2004, did not cause any major disaster to all over the nation, although there was some loss to the nearby village.

Nuclear energy has its own advantages. Nuclear power is of course a clean way of producing energy without any poisonous gases like carbon dioxide. Nuclear reactors also have a greater life cycle.

As we know that there are always two sides of a coin that cannot be separated from each other. Similarly its disadvantages cannot be ruled out. The nuclear weapons produced by the use of nuclear energy is an evident of it. We know such weapons have also been a major threat to our county's peace and safety.

But will these disadvantages stop us from exploiting the best use of nuclear energy? In my opinion, the best way to combat the disadvantages depends upon the best judgment of the nuclear suppliers. The nuclear bill passed in August 2010, has passed on the entire liability of the nuclear accidents to its suppliers. The suppliers need to completely review the infrastructure of the nuclear reactors to see as to how much the crisis can be managed by the reactors before making any further supplies of nuclear technology. A complete diagnosis of the safety measures is necessary to see as to how much the reactors are prepared if any disaster occurs in future.Regards,

Nuclear power energy is now the need of every developing country. As huge amount of energy is received from nuclear and this energy is very cheap.Japan is also developed due to the Nuclear power.

But nuclear power plants are not safe.If Japan like country who has most modern technology country can't protect himself from this tragedy then how we Indians protect himself from this tragedy.As Indian technology is not must advanced and Indian peoples are not aware.

So we have to go with other alternate sources of energy to fulfill our energy demand. As protection is the most important.

Yes, I am in favor of the motion that nuclear energy is a safe bet and India should steadily expand its nuclear potential. I present the following facts and analysis to justify my stand and I would also try to revert the apprehensions of my fellow ISC members in favor of Nuclear energy and would help them shed their doubts over nuclear reactors.

First of all, let me tell that why shouldn't we panic after the Fukushima incident. After the devastation at the Fukushima nuclear power station, due to the massive Tsunami that hit Japan, the Thirty-one countries operating nuclear power stations ordered safety review of their power plants, and so did India. In fact, Dr. Srikumar Banerjee, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission addressed all the safety concerns as far as the 20 Indian reactors are concerned, and he assured the Indian people that our nuclear reactors are cent percent safe. Anything that occurred at Fukushima does not even have a faint possibility of recurrence at any of our nuclear reactors, because of the basic difference between Fukushima reactors and our 20 reactors. The Fukushima reactor was situated close to the ocean to ease its access to water, the material used as coolant in the Fukushima power plant. But all our reactors use Hard water ( Di Deuterium oxide) as the primary coolant. So none of our reactors are situated that close to the sea.

Now I would statistically examine the safety of nuclear power plants. Till date there only have been three major nuclear accidents, the Three Mile Island accident, The Chernobyl disaster and the recent happenings at Fukushima nuclear station. In the Three Mile Island accident only one person was contaminated and no one was harmed. The Chernobyl disaster was a result of the operation in unstable operating regimes, which has now been banned and there have been strict safety regulations after that disaster and today's nuclear reactors are designed specifically to avoid that unstable condition. . The explosion that took place in Fukushima nuclear station wasn't in fact a nuclear explosion rather it was a series of Hydrogen explosions that took place there. Also the event can not be compared to Chernobyl disaster because the energy release wasn't from any nuclear fissure. Now the facts speak for themselves. These are the only major accidents to have occurred in over 14,400 cumulative reactor years. We have seen many accidents at thermal power stations, oil refineries, hydel-power stations etc., their frequencies and enormities have been very large as compared to nuclear accidents. Today's nuclear power plants are really very robust and the strict guidelines have only made them safer.

Now I come to the third and the most important point- our energy needs. At the rate with which we are burning fossil fuels, the reserves of fossil fuels are expected to be diminished soon. Consider this, at the current consumption rates, the depletion times for oil, coal and gas are approximately 35, 107 and 37 years, respectively. This means that coal reserves are available up to 2112, and will be the only fossil fuel remaining after 2042. So we need to find out newer fuel alternatives, but the million dollar question is that, what could be our alternatives? Solar energy is currently expensive to harness and the amount of energy generated is too less. Hydel energy has its problems too, it depends on the geographic factors and dams have their own ecological drawbacks. And all other alternate energy ideas are only in their preliminary stages like bio fuel and fuel cells. Nuclear power is the only cost effective and feasible option. Also the nuclear energy generation is an environmentally clean process, there no emission of any kind of greenhouse gases or any dangerous gases. Also nuclear fuel on burning produces no exhaust. Nuclear fuel is cheap and unlike the global oil prices trends nuclear fuel is absolutely stable and India would not have to depend on any country to satisfy its fuel needs. Imagine how much of India's resources can be saved if India is self sufficient in energy sector. The common man is already burdened by the rising oil prices; nuclear fuel will relive people of the high fuel prices. Also, India has large thorium reserves, India can be a potential fuel exporter and Indian economy will advance in leaps and bounds once this happens. Imagine, the status enjoyed today by Arab countries due to their oil might one day be enjoyed by India. Which patriotic Indian wouldn't wish this for India?

So we ultimately need to accept nuclear energy as the replacement to fossil fuels and if India acts smartly it can be the world's next powerhouse. Though safety is as important, but technological advancements will make nuclear energy generation safe. Mankind has had doubts in every invention and discovery in its initial stages, be it aviation, electricity, motor-vehicles etc. but our scientists and inventors have always thought new and safer innovations, similar will be the case with nuclear energy generation."With silence comes peace. With peace comes freedom. With freedom...comes silence."

Adityakumar states "technological advancements will make nuclear energy generation safe". I don't agree. Technological advancements, I feel, can never make any nuclear energy plants 100% safe. Look at the Bhopal gas tragedy. Decades after that horrible incident and despite lots of so-called safety measures, people are still suffering from the after-effects.

Similarly, in the case of radiation emitted by explosions created in nuclear plants there can be horrendous consequences for many many years to come. After all, technology is man-made and, as I said in my previous response, anything which is man-made simply cannot stand up to the fury of nature's activities. Nuclear energy plants can be enclosed, covered end to end, etc. Can the actual sources (machines or whatever) be made human-proof? That is, can they stop humans from being affected in case of a man-made accident or a natural calamity. No way!When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

Hi,@ Vandana Mam,Its correct that no machine can be made perfect and wherever there are machines there is every possibility of inefficiency but that doesn't mean that we should just stop !According to me noone on this earth is safe. Any other moment a meteor can strike our planet and life will vanish within seconds what can we do ?Also any form of energy you talk about, none can be harnessed without machines and similarly none is safe in that way. Hydroelectric energy is tapped through dams and the break down of dams just wash away everything close to it just like a Tsunami only.Similarly each and every factory or industry that is presently functional is because of machines only.One can't even imagine what amount of air pollution may be caused if the filters used in the chimneys of factories malfunction. There won't be anyone left due to lack of oxygen and it is also a rare case much like the leakage of Nuclear radiation in times of rarely large disasters striking totally unexpectedly.RegardsAkshayPay no heed to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !

First of all, referring to Vandana madam's remark over Bhopal gas tragedy, it wasn't a nuclear disaster, rather a leak of deadly methyl isocyanate gas from Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant caused due to utter carelessness, bad maintainable of the plant and leaking valves. Secondly, every technological advancements has stages, open any science encyclopedia and refer to any major invention or mechanism, the initial stages were the least perfect stages, and as researches, trials and errors proceeded the mechanism got better and safer.

I completely agree with Akshay. I agree that we are on nature's disposal. Nature's fury can destroy anything within seconds, but that doesn't mean we should stop innovating and inventing. By your logic one should stop using airways, as it is the most delicate form of transportation and any weather disturbances might send the plane crashing down.Every year cave-ins occurring in coal mines kill hundreds of miners, but coal is still mined out and thermal energy is still generated out of that coal.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) acts as a supervisor as far as world nuclear safety regulations are concerned. The inspectorates of all the nuclear reactors work closely with IAEA to assess and maintain safety standards. You know the nuclear power potential of any plant is many times greater than the actual energy harnessed , but these people accommodate the energy produced to a level safer than the threshold safety standards in order to cut any risks. The scientists are exploring the possibilities of nuclear fusion and passively safe plants in order improve safety of nuclear plants.

If you would have read my earlier response, you must have noticed that I mentioned that Fukushima incident wasn't a nuclear explosion rather it was hydrogen explosion caused due to an engineering that lacked foresight to apprehend potential Tsunami threats. The nuclear fission mechanism is nowhere to be blamed. There was core meltdown because of failure of water cooling system. The nuclear mechanism can not be blamed.In terms of immediate deaths it was a rather small disaster.

Already around 13% of the world's energy is produced by nuclear power plants. Where do we stand? Sadly, we stand nowhere. Its fine doubting a system, invention, process or mechanism but we must not focus on one aspect only. We should logically and rationally analyze all aspects and hope that our country achieves energy independence as soon as possible."With silence comes peace. With peace comes freedom. With freedom...comes silence."

@Adwaith: You have given good response and carried on diplomatic negotiation throughout your writing. Your point of closing down the reactors at danger-prone places is appreciable.

@Subramanian: We have nothing to boast with nuclear technology having simply getting 4.2% of entire power generation. We have power cuts in summer now. What is the reason? We are energy poverty people. That is why we are searching different ways to fill the gap created by ongoing disappearance of conventional fuels. Nuclear energy is the only solution for the time being.

@Vandana madam: The issues raised by you are considerable. But this is not the time. We have thermal energy in first place, hydroelectric energy in second place, renewable energy in third place. The fourth place is occupied by nuclear energy. Renewable energy is not giving us as we have expected. There is need of improvement a lot. Thermal energy is creating havoc. It is the sole reason for global warming. Hydroelectric energy is seasonal and dangerous if earthquake happens. Solar energy does not work in our cities where streets are crooked and so many people have forgotten about sun and moon as gigantic buildings stop their view. So we have to wait for some time. Till then, we have to carry nuclear power further.

@Jayanta Datta sir: I agree with you. You have given an example of why Japan had become super power is worthy to be lauded. Precaution is given at the end is also appreciable.

@Chandu: It is nice that you have given an example of Mullaperiyar dam and the terms you used "There is danger in each and every aspect of human technology" is also notable thing. Your emotions at the end are revealing your intentions.

@Sukhdev singh sir: I totally agree with sir of his views about- Showing the example of railway services and saying that one accident cannot close the services of entire system.- Our energy needs will never be met by renewable energies alone.

@ Question by Krishnadas sir: Why should we depend on nuclear energy? - Solar power is not yet developed. It is costlier and does not give enough energy as conventional sources do.

- Wind energy is not at all worthy in towns and cities like us where energy needs are more.

- Where can we find places for biogas in towns? Even though we find, it takes long time to generate biogas.

- Recent discovery is that windmills are creating noise pollution. There are complaints that it is not letting people sleep where they are installed.

India is not a nuclear greenhorn but despite generating nuclear power for 30 years our know-how is not up to date and our nuclear power generation amounts to just 3 percent of the total power generation capacity.

Nuclear power generation is competitive when the costs of coal and gas are high. The global meltdown that has made energy prices crash. In India nuclear power generation has currently lost its appeal as a cost-effective way of generating power. However in the long run nuclear power still makes sense as it will enable us to diversify our energy mix and help to manage carbon emissions.

The biggest hindrance to India's nuclear power policy is that we are most disorganized and ill-equipped for the handling of emergencies of any kind.

A recent survey showed that majority of Indians was worried about atomic safety. People believe that we will not be able to handle a nuclear disaster on the scale of that in Japan.

With our corrupt practices, dilapidated infrastructure and untested emergency procedures there should be a suspension on all further nuclear activity until further review.

So while skeptics may say that in terms of safety it is more dangerous to cross a street in Delhi, the fact is that as things stand it is not safe for our country to depend on a Nuclear Power plan for its energy requirement.Be Positive

In India we have six nuclear power plants. According to me they all should be closed. Now you would ask:How we will get energy resources? Then the answer to this is " Use other sources of energy such as hydro power plants, geo thermal plants, wind mills, and unlimited solar energy to produce energy, electricity.A question may come in your mind that " Whether these sources of energy are sufficient to fulfill current day requirement" ?Answer to this is : Absolutely yes.Many of you would argue that these sources are not enough to satisfy our developing India, as argued above. But as you know sun has much energy during day, utilize that during day and during night, utilize hydro energy or some other and the problem is solved.

Sukhdev sir commented; " We have to take risk. We can not shut down these power plant as a huge money will be wasted of Indian govt. Then there is only answer to this question. There will be much loss of money, resources and human beings when some calamity or disaster comes and it will take the shape of giant due to these nuclear power plants. According to me there is a alternative to all the things. Science and technology has given us various other options to choose from. Then why to go only for hazardous method. When there was shortage of coal as the fuel, science gave us oil to use as a fuel. Similarly when we are not in the condition to use these nuclear power plants, then science has given us more better technique. The main thing is that humans are assets, they have life, all things are done for them, then why he himself is the enemy of mankind.

We know Japan is a developed country. It has superior technology in the world, even then it can not control the effects of nuclear radiations, leave of controlling rather it was not able to even mitigate its effect. Then how we can imagine to support these power plants. If something like this happens in our country, then half of the population of India will vanish, as neither we are developed county nor we have strong technology.

These are just my opinions. I there is some one who want to ask me any thing, then he/she is welcome.

Thanks and regards,Ankit Sharma(Member ISC)Regards,Ankit Sharma

"Fragrance of flowers spreads only in the direction of wind, but the goodness of a person spreads in all direction."

First of all, referring to Vandana madam's remark over Bhopal gas tragedy, it wasn't a nuclear disaster, rather a leak of deadly methyl isocyanate gas from Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant caused due to utter carelessness, bad maintainable of the plant and leaking valves. Secondly, every technological advancements has stages, open any science encyclopedia and refer to any major invention or mechanism, the initial stages were the least perfect stages, and as researches, trials and errors proceeded the mechanism got better and safer.

I completely agree with Akshay. I agree that we are on nature's disposal. Nature's fury can destroy anything within seconds, but that doesn't mean we should stop innovating and inventing. By your logic one should stop using airways, as it is the most delicate form of transportation and any weather disturbances might send the plane crashing down.Every year cave-ins occurring in coal mines kill hundreds of miners, but coal is still mined out and thermal energy is still generated out of that coal.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) acts as a supervisor as far as world nuclear safety regulations are concerned. The inspectorates of all the nuclear reactors work closely with IAEA to assess and maintain safety standards. You know the nuclear power potential of any plant is many times greater than the actual energy harnessed , but these people accommodate the energy produced to a level safer than the threshold safety standards in order to cut any risks. The scientists are exploring the possibilities of nuclear fusion and passively safe plants in order improve safety of nuclear plants.

If you would have read my earlier response, you must have noticed that I mentioned that Fukushima incident wasn't a nuclear explosion rather it was hydrogen explosion caused due to an engineering that lacked foresight to apprehend potential Tsunami threats. The nuclear fission mechanism is nowhere to be blamed. There was core meltdown because of failure of water cooling system. The nuclear mechanism can not be blamed.In terms of immediate deaths it was a rather small disaster.India is not a nuclear greenhorn but despite generating nuclear power for 30 years our know-how is not up to date and our nuclear power generation amounts to just 3 percent of the total power generation capacity.

Nuclear power generation is competitive when the costs of coal and gas are high. The global meltdown that has made energy prices crash. In India nuclear power generation has currently lost its appeal as a cost-effective way of generating power. However in the long run nuclear power still makes sense as it will enable us to diversify our energy mix and help to manage carbon emissions.

The biggest hindrance to India's nuclear power policy is that we are most disorganized and ill-equipped for the handling of emergencies of any kind.

A recent survey showed that majority of Indians was worried about atomic safety. People believe that we will not be able to handle a nuclear disaster on the scale of that in Japan.

With our corrupt practices, dilapidated infrastructure and untested emergency procedures there should be a suspension on all further nuclear activity until further review.

So while skeptics may say that in terms of safety it is more dangerous to cross a street in Delhi, the fact is that as things stand it is not safe for our country to depend on a Nuclear Power plan for its energy requirement.

Well if someone is comparing nuclear energy with the wind energy and solar energy then they should know the exact difference between the amount of energy generated by these sources.I totally agree with Sandeep that yes,we are not at all organized at a level which is required and thus may hinder the future.And,now even Japan is also concerned for the Nuclear safety.So,in near future a committee is also developed who will be coming to our nation and will be discussing our whole infrastructure and may provide new and several other important points.But,a major concern is that how can we rely on japan who themselves are not capable of safeguarding there own?RegardsIti Tyagi"Soar to Success"

Mr. Tyagi, yes I am comparing the amount. I also agree with you. But you think for a moment whether there is a need of more energy in our country. In present scenario we do not have much energy crsis, then why we are forcing to adopt nuclear power plants.Regards,Ankit Sharma

"Fragrance of flowers spreads only in the direction of wind, but the goodness of a person spreads in all direction."

Oh no, we can't just ask our government to simply shut down all the reactors at once. The Indian government has already invested heavily on the infrastructure and associated investments, simply 'shutting down' is an absurd solution. It would be lame if India shuts down all its nuclear processes merely because a Tsunami dented a Japanese nuclear reactor. It is about the whole economy, such a lame step could lead to an unprecedented collapse of the Indian economy. It could send shock waves across the stock markets and the stock markets might eventually collapse.

As far as hydel and solar energy stand, I have already said and repeat, they will not be sufficient alone to satisfy our fuel needs after the fossil fuels extinguish. Their demerits have already been mentioned by my friend Vivek. Hydel and solar energy can only be secondary options, not the primary ones. We need a reliable solution. I am talking about the next 60 years, after that the oil could easily be gone, and at this time none of our alternate energy solution is in a stage that it may replace our energy sources. Nuclear energy is the nearest answer to solve our fuel demands.

I read that one of us mentioned that the Indian citizens have a lot of doubts over nuclear energy, but the real question is, whether the Indian people are really informed about the nuclear energy, its prospects, merits, mechanism of production, risks involved and demerits. Sadly, the answer would be no, in fact a big no.

As far as the issue of corruption stands, I am really saddened when one of our members says that the corrupt Indian setup can't be trusted as far as challenging avenues like nuclear energy are concerned. I would like to remind the member that however corrupt our country might be, we must not forget that our army still tactfully defends our borders and assures us of safety, our talented scientists still innovate and bring forth new defense equipments, space probes and satellites. We are a talent rich nation, we are known for our intellectual capital. Some of the best scientists, engineers, innovators are from our great country. Drawing analogies has never been a rational practice. We must shed our pessimism and trust our scientists and administrators.

21st century lies in the nuclear age, and we have to accept that. It has been our dream for generations to be an energy independent nation, and nuclear energy can very well fulfill that dream."With silence comes peace. With peace comes freedom. With freedom...comes silence."

@Mr.AnkitDo you really think we donot have energy crisis? Forget about the villages if we talk about cities only in north India, then I think a major part of U.P and M.P is facing a power cut every day of atleast 4 hrs. In places like Meerut, Agra, Varanasi, Allahabad etc the electricity is not there for more than 12 hrs a day.

Now a days in most of the houses there are inverters or generators and most of the apartments have power backups, so we actually do not realise the power crisis. But the fact is,we are short of electricity.

According to the statistic reports from one of the sources, India's major share of electricity production is through the Thermal power plants(i.e approx.64 %), 21%(approx.) through hydel power plants, 10 % by other renewable enegry resource and just 2.78% through the nuclear power plants. Where as, about 50% of world's electricity production in Japan, US and France is through Nuclear power plants. So my point here is when we are making optimum use of other natural resources what is the harm in keeping these 6 power plants also if they are protected?

I would also like to mention here that as of now our reactors are making use of nuclear fission for generating steam which in turn produces electricity. A typical nuclear fission reaction is one in which under controlled conditions an atom(nucleus) splits up into simpler atoms(nuclei)with the production of tremendous amounts of energy(which includes both elecromagnetic radiations and heat).Thus it produces high radioactive byproducts which are dangerous.

If instead of nuclear fission reactions, we make use of nuclear fusion, it would be much safer as it produces less radioactive components. A nuclear fusion reaction as the name suggests is one in which simpler atoms(say nuclei) combine together to form one heavy atom(nucleus). This fusion reactions also either produce or absorbs large amounts of energy depending upon the reactants used.

So in my opinion we can look forward to nuclear power plants also(atleast maintaining the ones we have,if not new ones) if and only if either the government seriously works on its protection issues or if they try to replace the fission rections by fusion reaction(which is not an easy task).

Thus on this node I would conclude my arguments on the given topic. Thanking everybody for the wonderful discussion above.Thanks & Regards,Akanksha P.VLead Editor(Ask Expert)

Mrs Akansha,Sorry for the energy crisis point. I accept my mistake. But what I am going to tell is not wrong.I agree what you said, there is energy crisis, we need energy and so on. But Don't you think we should increase the energy production by other sources of energy. Why to go for devastating process?I would like to tell you when calamities come, they don't alarm any one, tomorrow they may also come in India. And India's technology is not so developed to protect us. What to talk about India ,atomic destructions are that destructions whose effects can not be mitigated by any technology. Just think for a minute that we are under atomic destruction circumstances, then can you imagine what effect will be there. Let me tell you what will happen.Thousands of kilometers places situated around these regions(regions of atomic power plant) will become useless for several years. There will be no vegetation, no habitat, nothing. That place will be just useless. Evidences of events can be noted down from the incidents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These regions are the examples of atomic destructions. Peoples are born there with genetic disorder. There is no habitat even today. Whenever scientist try to check radioactive level of these places, they are found to be of higher intensities even today. Think if some how this happens in India, then we will be in great trouble. India already is a victim of overpopulation, poverty. What will be the fate of common man. You can not predict of that.Signs of a good developing country is that it should learn from the past. Do not repeat the mistakes which other developed nations did and not to follow the same path which other developed nations are following.

Thanks and regards,Ankit Sharma(Member ISC)Regards,Ankit Sharma

"Fragrance of flowers spreads only in the direction of wind, but the goodness of a person spreads in all direction."

Hi all,@ Mr Ankit,I disagree that the present sources of energy are enough to support our population explosion and even if it is sufficient that doesn't mean we sit down doing nothing for our future generations.You pointed that Japan couldn't control the radiations but you should be aware of the emergency situations prevailing there. India if not that much developed, is not far behind also, it is a strong competitor and a growing country. Who says India lacks technology, India has potential to be the world's superpower and if it doesn't have the potential then from where is so much development taking place ?

One more thing on which I would like to throw some light is the wrong concept you have regarding nuclear reactors and atomic bombs. Although they are based upon the same concept but in Reactors there is a controlled Nuclear reaction taking place and the reaction is stopped where necessary while bombs are based upon chain nuclear reaction and their reactions don't stop and in this way only they cause a lot of damage.Nuclear energy is surely somewhat risky if not dealt carefully but so are all other things. Electricity is also the most dangerous thing but we can't remove all the overhead wires carrying the same but we do put sign boards to aware all to deal carefully. This is what I'm saying, the Indian scientists should explore the possible threats of leakage before setting up a reactor and also it is quite obvious that they would surely be taking into account the geography also to take care of disasters because a Tsunami can't occur in non coastal regions and similarly careful selection of location is the only thing required.RegardsAkshayPay no heed to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !

This thread is locked for new responses. Please post your comments and questions as a separate thread.If required, refer to the URL of this page in your new post.

About IndiaStudyChannel.com

Being the most popular educational website in India, we believe in providing quality content to our readers. If you have any questions or concerns regarding any content published here, feel free to contact us using the Contact link below.